Morning journal and courier., 1887-04-21
COMMUNICATIONS.
The Shifting of Responsibility

To the Editor Of the JOURNAL AND COURIER:
Prof. w. g. Sumner has an article entitled
ssThe Shifting of Responsibility in a recent
issue of the Independent in which, if we un-
derstand him rightly, he takes issue alike
with the teachings of Christianity and the
principles of true democracy. He seems to
think that "the weak, ignorant undisciplin-
ed, poor, vicious or otherwise unfit" are but
a synonym for "the masses and that either
democracy is at fault or these classes should
shift for themselves as best they may, there
being no responsibility resting upon the edu-
Gated, the strong and the rich to amelio-
rate or improve their condition. He says:
'In short, the policy which we are invited to
accept is one in which every duty which a
man accomplishes is made the basis not for
rights and rewards, but for new duties and
subjection to new demands" and that s'the
well-to-do man is to do without things which
his means might but for himself in order that
he may pay taxes to provide those same
things to people who have not earned them"
We had supposed that herein consists
practical Christianity-that the strong and
the fortunate owe some duties to the weak
and unfortunate, and that the rich may
properly do without some of the superfu
tiles which their money might furnish them
that they may thus provide something to I'M
prove the condition of those who by reason
of their weakness or misfortune, or even their
vice, have not themselves earned the where
with to do it.
He says: "The man who by toll has tried
to get the knowledge which alone enables
men to judge is not to have the deciding
voice, but is to stand behind the man who
has neglected to get knowledge while the
latter gives the deciding voice, and to take
or avert the consequences" This, he says,
sis immoral to the very last degree and op-
posed to the simplest common sense"
It may be said here that common sense
does not always coexist with what sometimes
passes for knowledge. Few will deny that
in society there are many reciprocal duties
and responsibilities. But it seems hardly
we'll to teach that man is not his "brother's
keeper" and owes no duty to another for
which he is not to be repaid by him in full,
or that Christ's teaching, che that is great
est among you shall be your servant" of
which he gave a practical illustration by
washing the disciples feet, has became OBJ
solete. If I understand the position which
Mr.. Sumner assumes, he would, in short,
have US believe that the principles of Christ
| ianity and democracy should not be taught
side by side as essentials in our social and
political economy, and that we should view
with absolute horror the attempt to unite
| them in legislative enactments.
Does the professor also ignore ''nobless
obligeF'
A few years since Secretary Bayard at one
of the anniversary exercises of Yale took oc-
casion to tell the graduating class of the Law
school that they were concerned with the
statute law rather than the higher law. Pro-
fessor Sumner has the advantage of being
able to supplement his newspaper and maga-
zine articles with constant teaching of the
| doctrine of "laissez faire" from the chair of
| political economy which he occupies.
! To some the professors inculcations may
seem to indicate the position of "Yale uni
versity" But those to which I have alluded
are 1 think at variance with the genera
spirit of that venerable seat of learning.
| April 20, 1887. AMERICAN.